Supreme Court rejects damages bid in Atomic Veterans case

  • Print
  • Comments (6)

Readers' comments (6)

  • i am severely dissappointed in the judges of the supreme court. maybe u should look at my fathers file. I had a father that was exposed to S I X atomic bombs at MOnte Bello and Maralinga. When u see the medical letters you judges best run and hide cos God is now going to curse you to the same death my father had. Time barred is that your excuse? Give me a break. Corrupt Government will never succeed. Shergold Australia.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Limitation serves a useful purpose, but I cannot help but feel that in this instance justice has not been served.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It is quite shameful for the Supreme Court to mention throwing out the case of these humble, honest human veterans who dedicated their young and healthy life in carrying out these atomic nuclear dumping all in the name of Britian. I really sympathise with them, let alone the birds, fish, grass, sea, soil, rocks, stones, sand and the trees. Who knows what great damages this has done to the environment in the Pacific. If your reason was time barred, so for what reason could be given when the illness of this atomic dumping is affecting the children of the veterans right now and so their grandchildren and great-grandchildren and so forth. I hope that God will forgive you for throwing out this case and unfortunately God sees everything we do and we cannot hide from him. I for one believe, that your money will not be able to pay for the damages that has already been done to these veterans, even if the case was won, even all that money will not be able to cover for the lives of these veterans and their families. Quite a shame though.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • thetruthhasbeenignorediwastheir

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I am British army received nothing atomic veterans radiation exposure veterans compensation act, british military sexual trauma personal very serious injury, in additional compensation

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Personally, I am just so glad to see that justice has prevailed in this case. Why is everybody so anti-MOD? the law is the law is the law. Surely the vets should have devoted their energies to amending the Statute of Limitations, if they felt it necessary, rather than on what has proved to be fruitless litigation. Which law firm told them they had a case in the first place?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (6)